nanog mailing list archives
Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)]
From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam () gmail com>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 18:15:02 -0500
On Thu, 05 Feb 2009 17:18:15 -0500, Joe Abley <jabley () hopcount ca> wrote:
On 5-Feb-2009, at 13:44, Ricky Beam wrote:This is the exact same bull**** as the /8 allocations in the early days of IPv4.
...
So in fact it's not *exactly* the same.
Just because the address space is mind-alteringly larger does not mean the same flawed thought process isn't being used. In the mid-80's, /8's were handed out like candy because there were "lots of address space" and "we'll never use it all." Well, that didn't last very long. I've listened to IPv6 advocates singing that same song for a decade. They are doomed to repeat the same mistake. (sure, it'll take longer than with IPv4.)
You might like to review the DHCPv6 specification and try some of its implementations.
IPv6 was designed to "not need DHCP." DHCPv6 has come about since people need more than just an address from "autoconfiguration".
I can recall many posts over the years from the IPng WG telling people they didn't need DHCP.
--Ricky
Current thread:
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)], (continued)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Mohacsi Janos (Feb 09)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Mark Andrews (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] John Osmon (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Matthew Kaufman (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Mark Andrews (Feb 06)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] John Osmon (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Joe Abley (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Joe Maimon (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Nathan Ward (Feb 06)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 07)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Ricky Beam (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] David W. Hankins (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Joe Abley (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] David W. Hankins (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems Paul Vixie (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems Joe Loiacono (Feb 06)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems Jack Bates (Feb 06)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems Stephen Kratzer (Feb 06)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems Tim Durack (Feb 06)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems Joe Loiacono (Feb 06)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems Tim Durack (Feb 06)